October Relaunch: Opening on 1st October
Xender Facebook logo Linkedin logo Instagram logo Youtube logo
  (+1) 469 463 5461
WhatsApp
WhatsApp Message
Perplexity ChatGPT Claude Gemini

USCIS Withdraws Major Employment-Based Immigration Reform Proposal: What It Means for EB-1, EB-2 NIW, and EB-3 Applicants

Perplexity ChatGPT Claude Gemini
USCIS Withdraws Major Employment-Based Immigration Reform Proposal: What It Means for EB-1, EB-2 NIW, and EB-3 Applicants

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has quietly withdrawn one of the most closely anticipated immigration rulemaking proposals in recent years. The proposal, DHS/USCIS RIN 1615-AC85, titled “Petition for Immigrant Worker Reforms,” had been expected to reshape how USCIS evaluates petitions across the EB-1, EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW), and EB-3 categories.

In other words, the current adjudication standards now remain unchanged. However, the long-term direction of employment-based immigration policy remains an open question with this rejection. At GCEB1, our EB1A green card consultants believe that even a rejected policy can hold important insights into the evolution of the policies and the future of the visa program. Hence, we have dissected this news in great detail in what follows to provide all applicants with a detailed minutes of the evolution of policy changes.

A proposal that had been years in the making

USCIS first introduced the proposed rule in the Fall 2023 Unified Regulatory Agenda. At the time, the agency described an ambitious package of reforms aimed at modernizing regulations governing employment-based immigrant petitions. Over successive regulatory agendas in 2024 and 2025, the proposal remained active, with DHS repeatedly revising its expected publication timeline for a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM).

The proposal covered a wide range of employment-based immigration issues, including:

  • Updating regulations governing EB-1, EB-2 NIW, and EB-3 immigrant petitions.
  • Codifying existing USCIS policy guidance into formal regulations.
  • Clarifying evidentiary standards for Extraordinary Ability (EB-1A), Outstanding Professors and Researchers (EB-1B), and National Interest Waiver petitions.
  • Defining what constitutes a bona fide job offer.
  • Clarifying USCIS authority to conduct employer site visits.
  • Formalizing rules regarding successor-in-interest employers.
  • Updating long-standing provisions regarding an employer’s ability to pay.
  • Correcting outdated language, omissions, and inconsistencies within immigration regulations.

Notably, the agency stated that many of these proposed revisions stemmed from public engagement sessions and comments received from immigration stakeholders beginning in 2021.

The rule has now been officially withdrawn

The latest Unified Regulatory Agenda confirms that RIN 1615-AC85 has been withdrawn, with DHS identifying the rulemaking as a completed action rather than an active proposal. As a result, the anticipated NPRM will not be published under the current agenda.

This means there are no new regulatory changes taking effect for employment-based immigrant petitions as a result of this proposal.

For applicants currently preparing or filing Form I-140 petitions, USCIS will continue applying the existing regulations and policy guidance already in force.

What this means for EB-1A applicants

The proposed rule generated considerable discussion within the immigration community because it was expected to modernize regulations governing Extraordinary Ability petitions.

Although some online discussions speculated that USCIS might significantly raise evidentiary thresholds or fundamentally alter the EB-1A framework, no such changes were ever formally proposed in regulatory text. The Unified Agenda described broad reforms and clarifications but did not publish detailed regulatory language introducing stricter eligibility standards.

As things stand:

  • The existing EB-1A eligibility framework remains unchanged.
  • USCIS continues to evaluate petitions under current statutes, regulations, policy guidance, and applicable administrative decisions.
  • No new evidentiary requirements have taken effect because the proposed rule never advanced to the formal notice-and-comment stage.

Implications for EB-2 NIW and EB-3

The withdrawal also affects applicants pursuing National Interest Waivers and employer-sponsored immigrant petitions.

Had the proposal moved forward, DHS intended to clarify evidentiary standards for NIW petitions and codify existing administrative interpretations into regulation. It also sought to address employer-related issues such as successor-in-interest rules and the ability-to-pay requirement, both of which frequently arise in EB-2 and EB-3 adjudications.

Because the proposal has now been withdrawn, these areas remain governed by existing regulations, policy manuals, and precedent decisions.

Why the withdrawal matters

Although no immediate policy changes occur, the withdrawal is significant for several reasons.

First, it removes a major source of uncertainty that had persisted since 2023. Immigration attorneys and applicants had closely monitored the proposal because it could have introduced the most substantial regulatory updates to employment-based immigrant petitions in years.

Second, it illustrates that inclusion in the Unified Regulatory Agenda does not guarantee a rule will ultimately be issued. Federal agencies frequently revise, delay, or withdraw proposed regulations as administrative priorities evolve.

Finally, the decision underscores that employment-based immigration policy continues to develop through multiple channels: not only formal regulations, but also USCIS policy guidance, Administrative Appeals Office decisions, federal court rulings, and future agency initiatives.

Looking ahead

The withdrawal of Petition for Immigrant Worker Reforms (RIN 1615-AC85) does not necessarily mean employment-based immigration reforms have ended. DHS retains the authority to introduce a revised proposal in the future or pursue narrower regulatory changes addressing specific issues.

For now, however, employers, immigration attorneys, and prospective immigrants can proceed knowing that the existing framework governing EB-1, EB-2 NIW, and EB-3 petitions remains in effect. Applicants should continue preparing petitions based on current USCIS regulations and policy guidance rather than speculation about reforms that are no longer moving through the federal rulemaking process.

As one of the best eb1a consultancies, GCEB1 takes pride in mentoring applicants and candidates in the most organic way possible along with attorney support. If you are exploring the eb1a pathways or wondering whether you qualify, get in touch with us directly. We wish you a safe and stress-free immigration journey ahead.

Sources & further readings

 

Recent Post
How to Track Your I-140 Case Status Using USCIS Receipt Number
How to Track Your I-140 Case Status Using USCIS Receipt Number

After filing Form I-140, one of the most common questions employment-based immigrants ask is simple: “What’s happening with my case?” Whether you have applied independently or through an EB-1A green card consultancy, you will have to go through this form for your EB-1A green card application.

The Impact of The Dignity Act on The US Immigration Policy
The Impact of The Dignity Act on The US Immigration Policy

The Dignity Act is a layered and newly introduced bill that is going to change the face of the US immigration and all the surrounding landscape.
When Is Peer Review the Best EB-1A Judging Opportunity and How Should You Manage It?
When Is Peer Review the Best EB-1A Judging Opportunity and How Should You Manage It?

Peer review is often treated as a tactical checkbox in EB-1A strategy. It is thought of as a convenient way to satisfy the “judging the work of others” criterion. That framing is not just shallow; it is strategically dangerous for an EB-1A profile. The real question is not whether you can do peer review, but when it becomes the most credible and defensible expression of your expertise. Showcasing your peer review expertise willy nilly is never a good idea if you are looking to convince the USCIS adjudicators.
Why Tier-1 and Tier-2 Journals Are the Best Options for Your EB-1A Publications?
Why Tier-1 and Tier-2 Journals Are the Best Options for Your EB-1A Publications?

You have spent years building your research. You have contributed to your field in ways that few others have. Now, you are preparing your EB-1A petition, and perhaps you are wondering whether your publication record is strong enough to prove extraordinary ability. From our decade-long experience of providing eb1 mentorship, we have found out that it is not just about how many papers you have published. Most importantly, it is about where you are publishing them. Here, we have dived into the nuances of what actually matters as premium publications.
Trump Administration’s New Plan to Reject Asylum Pleas Without Interview
Trump Administration’s New Plan to Reject Asylum Pleas Without Interview

According to a report by CBS News, the Trump administration has developed a plan that would facilitate the U.S. immigration officials to quickly reject asylum applications without even conducting interviews. The source of this news is internal government documents obtained by CBS News.
Influencers and OnlyFans Models Are The Majority Among Extraordinary O-1 Visa Applicants
Influencers and OnlyFans Models Are The Majority Among Extraordinary O-1 Visa Applicants

The O-1 visa, or more specifically, the O-1B visa, is reserved for artists with extraordinary ability. However, recent reports show that the influencers and OnlyFans models are dominating among the successful applicants for this visa category.

Supreme Court vs. Trump: The Effort to Eliminate Birthright Citizenship?
Supreme Court vs. Trump: The Effort to Eliminate Birthright Citizenship?

The debate over birthright citizenship in the United States has reached a historic turning point, as the Supreme Court considers one of the most consequential immigration cases in decades. At the center of this legal battle is President Donald Trump’s attempt to redefine who qualifies as an American citizen. And, this effort directly challenges over 150 years of constitutional interpretation.
H-1B Visa Fee Rises Again: Trump Administration Moves to Make $103,265 Charge Permanent
H-1B Visa Fee Rises Again: Trump Administration Moves to Make $103,265 Charge Permanent

The Trump administration has taken its second run at imposing a new six-figure fee on the H-1B skilled-worker visa program. A proposed regulation released on Monday, August 24, aims to codify a new $103,265 charge on new H-1B petitions. This would be the second attempt of the administration to impose an H-1B fee, after a federal court struck down its first attempt in June. The move, reported by Reuters and confirmed across multiple outlets, marks the latest escalation in an already contentious fight over the future cost of hiring foreign skilled workers in the United States.
UK to Effect Visa Ban on Nations That Refuse to Take Back Their Deported Citizens
UK to Effect Visa Ban on Nations That Refuse to Take Back Their Deported Citizens

UK Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood has recently stepped in with a big announcement last Monday. She spoke of an effective visa ban on countries unless they accept the deported criminals and illegal immigrants, i.e. inhabitants of their own nations.

Trump's Proposed $100,000 OPT Fee: What It Means for Indian Students in America
Trump's Proposed $100,000 OPT Fee: What It Means for Indian Students in America

A proposal is reportedly under consideration by the Trump administration to impose a $100,000 fee on international students seeking to work in the United States after graduation. This news has rattled universities and employers alike, who warn it could upend the financial logic of an American education for hundreds of thousands of foreign students. The plan, first reported by the Wall Street Journal and later confirmed by Bloomberg, is not a full-blown policy yet. Officials at the Department of Homeland Security are reportedly discussing attaching the fee to Optional Practical Training (OPT), the program that lets international graduates work in the US for up to one year after finishing their degree (or up to three years for STEM graduates). It remains unclear whether the fee, if adopted, would fall on students, employers or universities.